Interpreting the Bible
How Do You Interpret the Bible?
Do you take the Bible literally? Or, do you view the Word as an anthology of wisdom that is full of metaphor, poetry and stories that can enhance an understanding of spirituality?
The question regarding how the Bible should be interpreted, literally or as a historical and metaphorical document, fuels an emotionally charged debate. The side you support depends upon what lens you are looking through when you read the Bible.
Interpretation of the Bible (or anything else for that matter) is influenced by factors that are often not within conscious awareness and that are developmental in origin (culture, religion, parenting, etc ). These factors form a prescribed set of lenses through which the Bible is viewed and by which opinions and interpretations are formed. Because opinions and interpretations influence behavior, it is essential for the spiritual seeker to first examine the lens through which they read and interpret sacred scripture. This is not an easy task, yet a study of the Bible must include introspection and an honest assessment of the reader's biases if it is to add value and meaning to spiritual growth.
Let's review the passage below (I Timothy) as an example.
Women should dress themselves modestly and decently in suitable clothing, not with their hair braided, or with gold, pearls, or expensive clothes, but with good works, as is proper for women who profess reverence for God. Let a woman learn in silence with full submission. I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she is to keep silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Yet she will be saved through childbearing, provided they continue in faith and love and holiness, with modesty.
Believing in the literal interpretation of this passage clearly directs that women should not be professors, teachers or clergy members. Neither should they braid their hair, wear nice clothes or wear jewelry. Likewise, the primary role of women is to bear children. Accordingly, there are some religions that practice such beliefs. Amish women, for example, wear very modest clothing.
Viewing this text from a historical or metaphorical perspective would provide a very different interpretation. The meaning of the above passage would be based upon its historical context including early Christianity's view of the role of women. This interpretation would not be in conflict with today's society of equality for women's rights, women professors, or even a woman for president.
Each interpretation of the Bible, literal or metaphorical, presents a series of problems. Consider the following passages:
Matthew 19:21
Jesus said unto him, if thou wilt be perfect, go sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come follow me.
Mark 10:21
Then Jesus beholding him loved him and said unto him. One thin thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.
Luke 18:22
Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.
The literal interpretation is clear. All possessions must be sold and given to the poor. Believers are directed, then, to have no possessions. A metaphorical/historical interpretation would consider the historical context of the passage. This includes the common practice of monks during that time who lived in poverty and practiced simple asceticism.
When the Bible is taken literally, is it a fair statement to say that the reader cannot pick and choose which passage to apply a literal meaning to and which to ignore? Is it a fair statement to say that Christians must accordingly, not own any possessions?
When the Bible is viewed as a historical or metaphorical source of wisdom, is it fair to say that the reader might dismiss the deeper meaning of the metaphor? The wisdom found in the above passages encourages the believer to give to the poor and share of their wealth. If this wisdom is discounted (as seems to be the case when we think about the number of homeless, poor and hungry in the world), then the strife of the poor will never be changed.
There is much confusion and concern over the new laws in New York regarding same-sex marriage. Often the Bible is quoted to support or condemn same-sex marriages. Which lens do you use when you consider such a hot political topic? Do you consider the context of the passage shown below or do you take a literal interpretation?
Leviticus 18:22
Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
A literal interpretation is clear--homosexuality is abominable (meaning a detestable act.) plain and simple. Is it to be interpreted as clearly as the owning of possessions--that it should not be done?
A historical/metaphorical interpretation would take into consideration the historical context surrounding this passage, including the desire of early Christian leaders to limit pagan practices and sexual rituals before false idols.
Whichever lens used to interpret these and other passages of the Bible, the seeker must be aware of the biases and prejudices that tint the lens with which the sacred text is read. The lens is not the Bible, but can be inappropriately used to prove a point or to validate and support a standard of behavior. The danger of literal interpretation is clear. It can lead to attempts to enforce concepts and ideas that were meant for another time and not applicable to today's world. It can feed prejudice and hatred as history has shown through eons as in slavery and the oppression of women.
The danger of the historical/metaphorical interpretation is clear. It can lead to interpretations that discount or miss the true and wise direction of the Bible. When these important messages are missed, the health of our spiritual growth is at risk.
So what lens should be used to view the Bible? While it may sound simplistic, perhaps a lens that can perceive clearly a message that is pure and cannot be contaminated - God is love. What do you think?
Comments